City Comforts, the blog

Consumer Reports: Contact Us — Not

I have an old car and was wondering how to get at the question of when to buy a new one — how to take into account the myriad factors to determine not which car (Consumer Reports is great on that) but when to get rid of it. Pretty obvious question but not so easy, I think. That's where I bet Consumer Reports could help.

I was looking through the Consumer Reports website and saw nothing which I thought to be on point and wanted to write a polite little suggestion letter on that issue.

Wow! I have never ever seen a web site which is so difficult to access....to write to staff at CU to offer suggestion, comments etc etc Consumer Reports really ought to take a look at the process. It is absurdly difficult to offer feedback. 

And I think that does not reflect well on an institution -- of all places! -- which harps (correctly) on the need for large institutions to be transparent.

Take a look at the Consumer Reports Consumer Reports Feedback Page

I am curious to hear your reaction but I bet it will take you links to at least a half-dozen pages from the top — www.consumerreports.org .Just to write a simple "Letter to the Edior." Try it. 

Or did I miss the easy route?

Is a picture worth a thousand words?

And I don't mean my own prosaic banal snapshots but the luscious color, sexy, large-format even-a-tire-dump-looks-good-seductive photos by Edward Burtynsky. Via Treehugger, Burtynsky has a new book on quarries. Is it gorgeous? Yes. Do I agree with his philosophy? as set forth by him at Treehugger:

We are surrounded by all kinds of consumer goods, yet we are profoundly detached from the sources of those things. Our lifestyles are make possible by industries all around the world, but we take them for granted, as background to our experience. I feel that by showing those places that are normally out side our experience, but very much a part of our everyday lives, I can add to our understanding fo who we are and what we are doing.

Well said indeed! The vast majority of us are unaware of how processes in our industrial world actually happen.

But does his book actually increase our understanding? And increase our isolation from the physical processes of the world? Do Burtynsky's assemblages show the process and not just an ambiguous slice? I don't know. I haven't read the book. But based on the absolutely beautiful photos shown on Burtynsky's site, I wonder. For example, it's stunning:

Rock of Ages # 1,
Active Section, E.L. Smith Quarry, Barre, Vermont, 1991

But what does it mean? What's the backstory? the current situation? and the future curve? How many people work there? All men? How long have they worked there (average age?) The black disscoloration -- what's that? Is that blue box a porta-potty? What's happening at the inactive section? How long does it take to remove blocks? And what kind of rock is tht anyway? The questions go on and on. I don't think you can say much by the image alone. Unless Burtynsky's photos are amplified by words, by captions, by explanation and interpretation, his work is just pretty pictures which does not, by his own standard, increase "understanding."

A picture may be worth a thousand words, but even just a few hundred words in addition can amplify that photo into ten thousand.

So I will take a look at his book the library and get a sense of what he has done. The pictures are stunning but without words, text. explanation. interpretation. and even opinion, the punch line is missing.

Neat way to use 'City Comforts'

Download People + Design: City Comforts

 

Replace Zoning with a Business Improvement District?

Tea Partying at Planning Meetings | Market Urbanism

UPDATE:

Besides equity and the central issue of environmental quality,  I left this comment at Market Urbanism: 

...my major concern about the idea of "...likewise provide a regulated built environment through voluntary private contracts." is NOT that I don't like the idea. In fact it's fine. The "least intrusive means" should be always kept in mind. The only issue for me is the huge transaction costs which, I believe, make private agreements for land use quite impossible. Thed very reason we have government is because "voluntary private contracts" are too complex. We got rid of tort law (as to land use) because it was much easier to have uniform area-wide regulations.

 In short, I simply don't think it can be dome. Too complex. Too much transaction cost.

 

 

Fallows Follows the Filibuster — and worse, Nullification

James Fallows in The Atlantic has been writing about the filibuster and I urge him to keep it up. For example he wrote today

The Congress is finally moving ahead on a budget bill and a temporary extension of the payroll tax cut. End of obstructionism and modern "nullification"? Unfortunately not.

Read what Fallows has to say. But his post made me think of my own major regret (and so far I fear) about Obama: that Obama does not use his communication skills. He is enormously articulate but does not use it to raise consciousness.

The only thing I can personally remember  (and certainly I haven't heard some great things or forgot them) was his riff on "American exceptionalism." Though a quick response in a press conference (?) it was exceptional in its brilliance and could have been expanded (and explained so that no one could think that he doesn't love America) into a full-bore explanation about America's role in the world.

Other than that, I am not sure I can recall anything that Obama has said which enlightened me. I have heard his policies etc etc but with that one exception I can't recall that he has said anything worthy of his intellectual and rhetorical ability.

My point is illustrated by the tawdry Cordray affair.

Obama's correct response -- and he can still do it -- should be to speak above his political opponents by explaining, in a fair-handed and very polite manner, insulting no one and burning no bridges, the way politics is now conducted in the US Senate. 

Obama has the chance to speak to and educate American voters about how things work. Explain the various pressures on an elected official, how one gets elected, the mechanics of Washington DC and so forth. He'd focus on the change in the Constitution from 51% (the childhood notion of Majority Rule) to 60% and he'd condemn. Like Glenn Beck, he could use the medium of chalkboard or graphics to illustrate the change in filibustering over theist 15 (?) years. Etc etc. There would be no hectoring but mere explanation of how things work --or don't. Get above and outside the DC discourse by raise consciousness among the whole people about the mechanics of governing.

Of course there is a necessary realm of private discussion and disretion and I don't expect a President to get into "He said..." or "He promised..." But with his skill I am sure he could start saying things which actually interest me and educate me (rather than simply setting forth policies with which I agree or disagree.)

Ask yourself. What have you learned from Obama? Tell me, I am curious.

 

Nervous About PubliCola

Nervous About Rumors — PubliCola.

It would help Publicola separate itself from the rest of the lame-stream media (I'm afraid that Palin did call it correctly) by using TIME as an element of rumor-spreading.

For example, you state above "Democrats in Olympia are working on a potential $1.5 billion bond proposal for construction projects to send to voters this year. The current package—being discussed on both the senate and house side—would end up bringing in about $100 million through sales tax revenues from construction and would create about 30,000 construction jobs."

Don't you think your rumor might be a little more useful if you could add some thing like "...and would create about 30,000 construction jobs FOR X PERIOD OF TIME?"   Or maybe acknowledge that "...would create about 30,000 construction jobs BUT NO ONE IN OLYMPIA WANTS TO DISCUSS HOW LONG THE JOBS WILL LAST."

The number of jobs created really shouldn't be much consideration of any political calculus -- it's absurd to borrow money to create jobs UNLESS YOU REALLY WANT THE WORK DONE. But much of the justification for any project always involves "job creation." That is natural politics but bad public policy.

So it's even more absurd for Publicola to fail to ask whether those construction jobs are for the NEXT THIRTY YEARS (the presumed lifetime of the bonds) or the NEXT SIX MONTHS (a plausible duration for a project.)

"With Seaside in his blood, Larry Davis set to open house on New Urbanism-inspired real estate office."

And it all began with a bench.

"I started thinking one day about all the walkers and bikers that use the bike path on 30A, and it occurred to me that there was no place for someone to sit down along the bike path," he said.

Now there is.

The 7- or 8-foot-wide Adirondack-style bench was creatively painted by Davis' artist wife, Melissa, and placed right along the bike path in front of his new office.

"It's my gift to 30A," he said. "It provides seating and is a conversation piece. It's public art."

Davis said his goal is to lead by example and hopes to see other businesses along 30A put up artistic benches for the public.

He didn't stop with the bench, however.

Davis points to another proponent of New Urbanism in the book "City Comforts: How to Build an Urban Village" by David Sucher.

"Sucher said you must give back to the street, build close to the sidewalk, create public seating, engage, and quench the thirst people have for community," said Davis.

And, he did just that.

Embedded in concrete out front is a hopscotch rectangle adorned with brass to engage kids of all ages as they pass by.

via www.waltonsun.com

Good movie, great deal-making

I saw Steve Jobs — The Lost Interview last week and it was very good. Surprised that the audience (in Seattle!) was only half-full but then again maybe the advance publicity was too quick and maybe a bit meager. There is a considerable fascinating backstory and here's part, from Robert X. Cringely, the auteur:

Of all the reader suggestions for what I should do with my little film Steve Jobs — The Lost Interview, not one involved showing the movie in theaters. Yet that was the first thing that came to my mind. How old media-like of me and how new media-like of you.  So we’re opening November 16th for a short run in about 20 U.S. theaters. These are mainly Landmark Theaters, but some others are now coming on and we’ve even had inquiries from Europe and Asia (keep them coming, please).  The idea came to me late at night so I e-mailed Landmark owner Mark Cuban who replied in five minutes. proving insomnia has its virtues. (italics added) via www.cringely.com

"The idea came to me late at night so I e-mailed Landmark owner Mark Cuban who replied in five minutes."

How very Jobsian! "I e-mailed Landmark owner Mark Cuban who replied in five minutes." Wow! What a backstory!

Anyway, go see the movie when it re-emerges, whether in theater or Netflix etc etc.

But among many things, what struck me in the movie was a quote Jobs offered:

“Good artists copy, great artists steal."

And I don't get it. As I wrote in comments, here,

'...“copying” and “stealing” are along the same vector: using someone else’s work as one’s own.'

Please tell me what you think. "Copying" versus "stealing." The difference is a matter of intent. I had (apparently) mis-heard the saying years ago as “Brilliance invents. Genius copies.” which I think is more interesting, or at least, different. :) Maybe the contrast would be even better as “Competence invents. Genius copies.” 

THE Thanksgiving Tip of the Week

"If the turkeys' free-range foraging takes them onto public roads, don't herd them from behind (as a sheep dog does), but call them towards you with the promise of food.  This can save many Thanksgiving dinners in the community." 

from The Iindispensable Muffy Aldrich

Accessory Dwellings | a one-stop source for everything about ADUs, granny flats, backyard cottages, in law units…

Building a detached ADU isn’t necessarily different than building a house. accessorydwellings.org

And actually, quite important.

It's a new site and I wish it well. I'll be reading.

•••

Many years ago I approached an editor at Sunset and suggested some article about ADUs. She snorted (though kindly) and told me that Sunset management would never allow anything but single-family houses. I suspect that times have changed big time.

Forget about the Apple TV -- the big kahuna is the Apple Automobile

Charlie Rose has spent the latter half of this week with segments and interviews devoted to Steve Jobs. The video above features discussions with former Google CEO and current Google Chairman Eric Schmidt, Wall Street Journal reporter and friend of Jobs, Walt Mossberg, and Marc Andreessen, a venture capitalist and the creator of the Mosaic web browser and Netscape.

via osxdaily.com

A wortyhwile interview. For me the take-away thought is simple:

Apple is the current master of human interface engineering. When will an auto manufacturer beg Apple to ask it to re-think and re-dsign the human interface? The total environment which the person uses to control the auto? I am sure that Jobs has thought of it and hope that Apple will eventually work on it. It would be nice if it were an American manufacturer (or at least one with heavy American employment.)

Midweek Tech Scan: Why does Microsoft own Skype? | Crosscut.com

Microsoft keeps pushing ahead on several fronts in the consumer area, including one of the more mysterious acquisitions in the tech field.  This past week, Microsoft completed the acquisition of Skype, that ubiquitous, pioneering computer based phone service that makes it possible to talk to people worldwide for free — if they have a Skype app on their computer — or call land lines and cell phones at low cost.

via crosscut.com

I wonder if it might have made even more sense for M'soft to spend $8.5 billion by using the $$$ to make an operating system as good as Apple's? To protect its own franchise and dominance in operating systems rather than getting into a new business? Ya know, re-design the Windows OS from the ground up, as Jobs did with the Mac OS ten years ago. The core of the company is still Windows. True? Wouldn't sticking to its knitting be wise? Apple is great but it is still run by human beings down there in Cupertino and so with all its resources, why can't M'soft be competitive? I have to admit that I haven't seen a Windows OS for a year or two, so maybe there is huge progress. (I guess that is why we will have a M'soft store in U Village so people like me will eventually get curious.) And if there is a reason to care, I live here in Seattle and so I would like M'soft to do well -- employment, my neighbors, support etc etc -- and be interested in buying a Windows product. Some day. But not now. Just too clunky.

Will book publishers be able to maintain primacy as ebook publishers?

via www.idealog.com

My own thoughts:

Legacy publishers will survive to the extent that they can act as curators -- as "a good housekeeping sign of approval" (that probably dates me) that a book is worthy. They don't have to vouch for a book in any specific sense much less agree with its opinions -- but simply that the book is in some way "serious."

Of course that does leave room for others to get in on the curatorial role. We might see "imprints" from major, respected opinion leaders. Why not one by Bill Clinton? or Paul Krugman? or Stewart Brand?  Stephen King? etc etc or name anyone you respect.

Would such an eminence get into the nitty-gritty of editing, design, promotion, marketing etc etc? Probably not directly though their editorial judgment would be a real and key factor in the success of their "publishing company." So while figure-heads might work, I question their staying power.

My point is that once you get rid of physical books -- no responsibility to manufacture, warehouse, transport etc etc -- what is a publishing company besides 

1. the judgment that a "book" (whatever _that_ turns out to be) is worthy of being read, 

2. editing to take a raw manuscript into a finished ebook, and 

3. promoting/marketing.

Legacy publishers may be able to thrive -- counter-intuitively -- precisely because it is so easy to "self-publish." How do you, as a reader, separate the wheat from chaff? The curatorial function comes to the fore.

 

 

The "serendipitous encounter"

It applies not only to people but to books, maybe even on-line. Here is an interesting insight:

Google has something all of these platforms don't have: a specialism in "discoverability". If Google can somehow leverage its skill in this area, then there is a possibility that it could open up a world of published content online in a way that even Amazon has been unable to so far. Google could begin to replicate the bookstore experience, particularly the serendipitous nature of many purchases -- or to put it another way: books found when searching for something else.

via thebookseller.msgfocus.com

"books found when searching for something else."

That's how the best friendships are found.

Someone else said it:

David Sucher’s definitive book on urban design, City Comforts,

via vodaplan.com

A simple and good idea

Walking with the Manager

On Thursday, September 15, at 8:30 a.m., “Walking with the Manager" will begin at the Ormond Beach Municipal Airport Control Tower located at 725 Hull Road. Walkers should meet at the Shuffleboard Complex next to the Control Tower. The walk will be approximately 2 miles.

Joe Mannarino, Economic Development Director, and Steven Lichliter, Airport Manager, will be the City Manager’s “guest walkers.”

Citizens are invited to join the City Manager, Economic Development Director, and the Airport Manager for a walk, ask questions, share comments and offer suggestions.

Please put on your walking shoes and join us.

via www.ormondbeach.org

As to "Living Buildings"

I am perfectly happy to let the chips fall where they may but at the outset I am curious why it is "more green" to have, say, an on-site sewage-teatment system that one which is community- or even region-wide? That's implicit in "living building" philosophy. But where are the numbers? On what basis do we assume or state that it is better?

I can concede that using natural rainfall for use on site makes sense. Or that treating storm-water run-off on-site makes sense ecologically. (It can also be a cheaper, too.)

But there are economies of scale in many human activities and I would expect to see them in waste-treatment as well.

There's another element. It would seem that the living buildings goal would limit the size of buildings. If you are going to rely on natural rainfall to supply drinking water for an apartment building, that would limit the number of apartments you can handle on a site or encourage spreading out ("sprawling") over larger areas.

It might work and be effective but color me skeptical at this point.

via www.scientificamerican.com

"...how you do the ground plane well"

Toderian, interviewed at the end of our research, in many ways blew our central argument out of the water. With energy use no longer a serious problem because of newer green techniques, and a growing awareness of streetscaping and the necessity to foster urban life, why not allow height as part of your city’s toolbox?

"Towers often get a bad reputation based on how they land and often that’s true. But I just as often see mid-rise buildings land poorly," said Toderian. "This isn't the tower vs. mid-rise issue, this is the how you do the ground plane well, a universal question no matter what form you’re designing." (italics added)

The trick, he explained, is to be very rigorous with urban design standards and planning out the where, why and how of siting skyscrapers. “We likely take more of a design approach to the height question than any other city in North America, and we regulate, locate, shape and even limit height more than other cities, based on our civic values and goals,” he explained.

via www.planetizen.com

I couldn't agree more with Toderian about "the ground plane." which suggests that what is most important about how a building "lands" is whether it needs to and/or does adhere to the 3 Rules.

But a fine point — I am a bit puzzled a the shift: Toderian explains (para 2) the importance of the ground plane (i.e. what happens at the street level) and then moves (para 3) to siting of skyscrapers.

So far as I interpret him, what's most important is not the location of a the skyscraper but whether, in a given location, any proposed building should be designed to meet the ground for pedestrian comfort. Of course in an urban location, every building should meet it thoughtfully and the only issue is the degree to which it must have ground-floor commercial, (which may in some unusual location need not be desirable or feasible.) So if the ground plane is pre-eminent, then why have strict control over height?

•••

And I am also a bit curiuous about how percisely one can regulate "based on our civic values and goals" and wonder how such broad and abstract strictures work fairly. Of course zoning has never been precise and public administration is not like managing a machine shop. But the enormous discretion allowed by regulation "based on our civic values and goals" can lead to who-knows-what. Then again, so far, Vancover has done a pretty good job and so far as I can tell, without any or much accusation of unfair administration.

 

A guide to city comfort

“City Comforts: How to Build an Urban Village” by David Sucher, is a book I consult often. It is heavy with photos of how and why urban settings work or not.

via blogs.sites.post-gazette.com

Dom Nozzi’s Opinion

David Sucher is the author of City Comforts, a fantastic, easy-to-read, important book about the essential elements of designing a quality city. I strongly recommend the book.

via walkablestreets.wordpress.com

Email to Steve Jobs about the new iPhone

Dear Steve.

I want a method of clipping a lanyard to my iPhone.

I want to be able take my iPhone out of my ski parka when I am on a ski lift and not worry that I will drop it.
Add something like the type of attachment point used on cameras. 

Like this, though of course done with more style (i.e. by Apple):

 

Lawrence Block on the Guy who Sold A Million Books on Kindle in 5 Months

A couple of months ago I downloaded a 99¢ novel by John Locke. I’d become aware of him as a dominant presence on the Kindle bestseller list and figured I ought to see what all the fuss was about. I don’t remember which book it was, and I don’t see why it should matter. I didn’t finish it, not because it was horrible, but because it didn’t knock me out. (Hardly anything does, at this stage in life, and I don’t start reading as many books as I used to, and finish but few of the ones I start. But that’s me, see. It’s not the fault of the books.) ...

...Then John Locke got a ton of press for selling his one millionth Kindle book. And, as soon as he did, he released a book he’d had waiting in the wings all along. He called it How I Sold 1 Million eBooks in 5 Months, and offered it not at his usual price of 99¢ but $4.99 (or $9.99 in paperback).

Yeah, right, said the snarky voice that lives inside my head. Who could resist paying five bucks to learn how to write mediocre fiction?

I told the voice Thanks for sharing and ordered the book. This was on June 21, and I started reading it on my Kindle that night. I read the rest of it the following day, and started re–reading it the day after that. And the next day was June 24, my birthday, and I started the day doing something I’d been absolutely certain I would never do. But what the hell, I figured I was finally old enough. So I joined Twitter.

Because John Locke told me to....

...And if he writes more about salesmanship or promotion or the business of being a writer, he’ll get an immediate one–click order from me.

via lawrenceblock.wordpress.com

My question for Mr. Block at his blog:

Now I am looking for a book on “How to Write Great NON-Fiction.” Ever seen one?

Biography is relatively easy because it is natural to tell a linear story. But what if one is writing about, say, urban design & planning — as I do — which most people find boring.

I’ve been advised to personalize such as by starting “John and Joan were a young couple looking for a home…”

I hate that trick when I read it and won’t do it.

So what are the commonalities (besides knowledge of the subject and a simple sentence) in great NON-fiction?

Sincerely asked.

 

"Comparing Spokane St., Alaskan Way viaducts" — Convinced?

From the Seattle Times in spring 2010:

Q: Marvin Jahnke, of Burien, says he recently received an informational bulletin from Seattle's Department of Transportation (SDOT) outlining the $168 million Spokane Street Viaduct project.

He says he's puzzled. "How is it that this amount of refurbishment can be put into a viaduct that is older than the Alaskan Way Viaduct, and built on the same sort of ground as the Alaskan Way Viaduct, and yet the Alaskan Way Viaduct must be torn down?" he asked.

He says he's observed support piers under the Spokane Street Viaduct being rebuilt in recent years without much public fanfare, yet SDOT seems to go public with its periodic measurements of Alaskan Way Viaduct settling.

"Could the salvation of the Spokane Street Viaduct be that there are no expensive views to be gained by its demise?" he asked.

A: While the Alaskan Way Viaduct, which was built in the 1950s, and the Spokane Street Viaduct, built in the 1940s, may appear similar, they have some very distinct differences, says John Buswell, SDOT's roadway structures manager.

"For example, the two-level Alaskan Way Viaduct has a significant weakness at the point where the top roadway is connected to the lower roadway," said Buswell. That is not an issue for the single-level Spokane Street Viaduct.

He said the seismic retrofit solution for the Spokane Street Viaduct has, in part, been to build a new parallel bridge. The new bridge is being built to modern earthquake standards and is designed to hold up the older portion.

Yes, the city has invested over the years in the older portion, Buswell said, and SDOT believes that has preserved the Spokane Street Viaduct. But, "there will come the day when the old section can no longer be maintained and will need to be replaced."

On the other hand, the Alaskan Way Viaduct's age and vulnerability are showing, says Jugesh Kapur, state bridge and structures engineer for the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). It's pretty hard to ignore crumbling concrete, exposed rebar, weakening column connections and deteriorating railings.

When the Alaskan Way Viaduct was built, the structure's columns were not placed deep enough into stable soil, Kapur says. Instead, that viaduct stands on fill soil that Kapur says can become quicksandlike in an earthquake.

The state did consider retrofitting the old Alaskan Way Viaduct, Kapur said. "However, several studies have shown that a retrofit would be a poor investment."

By WSDOT's figures, the cost of retrofitting the Alaskan Way Viaduct would be about 80 percent of the cost of a new structure. Kapur says federal guidelines recommend replacing a structure when retrofitting exceeds 50 percent of new construction costs.

via seattletimes.nwsource.com

Dense, Denser, Densest by Witold Rybczynski

From www.wilsonquarterly.com

Rybczynski is correct in using the phrase "proponents of downtown living" and illustrates one of the issues.

It seem to me that such a term "proponent" suggests something which should you should do because it's good for you, like eating spinach.  Why be a "proponent" and just enjoy living there? But Rybczynski has it right.

An awful lot of the public discussion about cities is driven by fears -- "sustainability" and "peak oil." Downtown = dense. Dense = using less oil. Using less oil = dealing with peak oil. And so on.

As someone who simply likes and enjoys cities, such downtown living proponents strike me as weak allies. The best reason to like cities is because of pleasure, not fear.

 

Prince Charles driven “insane” by classicist label

But you can't take media too seriously. On the one hand, one source (BD Online) quotes  Prince Charles as saying:

“I think a lot of people think the only reason I set up the Foundation is because I have an obsession with classical architecture. That drives me insane. It is very easy to accuse people of that but at the end of the day, architecture matters.”

It's a peculiar statement as somewhat off point since there is in fact other than classical architecture. Oh well, it's easy to misquote someone in extermperaneous talk.

Then again the London Times  accuses of being against The Enlighenment, which if anything would suggest an anti-Classicist stance:

Its seminal figures included the likes of Descartes, Leibniz, Locke, Voltaire and Rousseau. To Prince Charles, however, it is old hat. “I was accused once of being the enemy of the Enlightenment,” he told a conference at St James’s Palace. “I felt proud of that.”

The Prince, who was talking at the annual conference of The Prince’s Foundation for the Built Environment , went on: “I thought, ‘Hang on a moment’. The Enlightenment started over 200 years ago.

“It might be time to think again and review it and question whether it is really effective in today’s conditions, faced as we are with huge challenges all over the world. It must be apparent to people deep down that we have to do something about it.

“We cannot go on like this, just imagining that the principles of the Enlightenment still apply now. I don’t believe they do. But if you challenge people who hold the Enlightenment as the ultimate answer to everything, you do really upset them.”

Who knows what the Prince actually said, much less meant, but my advice to him (not that he cares) is to avoid The Enlightenment and stick with something simple like "reality-based thinking." 

 

More on alternate tread stairs

As a fan of alternating tread stairs, and the owner of a rare city-permitted custom made set of them in the granny cottage I built, I’ve always been curious about one staircase option I did not use: the Arke Karina stair kit.

via bottleworld.net

LANDSCAPE URBANISM FOLLOWUP

Since my last post, about the new Race Street Pier in Philadelphia, there have been challenges on my Facebook link to the post as to (1) whether the High Line is Landscape Urbanism and (2) whether landscape architect James Corner was involved in designing the High Line and (3) whether James Corner is a Landscape Urbanist.

via street-trip.com

My response to Sandy's questions:

(1) whether the High Line is Landscape Urbanism 

I see no reason why Landscape Urbanism (LU) should claim that the High Line is a manifestation of whatever teachings one can tease out of the LU writings. In fact LU does NOT make such a claim as it would be preposterous.

However, while making no explicit statement in any manner that the High Line is a manifestation of LU, Corner's chapter in the LU Reader suggests a silent connection between High Line and LU by simply placing a photo of the High Line as the front piece of his chapter. By implication -- and misleading, I think --  the photo and his chapter does link the two. But Corner -- rightly so -- offers no words in his chapter to explain why the High Line reflects his own thoughts (such as they may be) in his chapter. Nor have I been able to find any documentation in which anyone explains exactly how the High Line is a manifestation of LU thinking. 

Wikipedia's entry offers no such explanation. And the reason it doesn't is because it can't. There is no connection between the High Line and LU thinking.

If there is such connection which passes the smile test, I am happy to modify my view.

2) whether landscape architect James Corner was involved in designing the High Line 

It depends on what you mean by "design." Certainly, obviously, Corner was one of the designers to decide on the stairs, which pavement to use, which plantings, the lighting, the places to sit etc etc and so forth. With a few quibbles it's a very good job and Corner et al should to be commended.

But Corner had nothing to do with the initial impulse to convert the old rail line into a linear park or with the politics to implement it. Corner entered a design competition to do what I call the "tactics" and won.  
But the "strategic" vision -- recognizing that the High Line RR should be a High Line Park -- came from two neighbors, two non-designers, two amateurs I might add, and then had the enormous political talent to persuade a host of NY luminaries and the gumption to follow-through.

The critically important "design" was strategic — by the neighborhood amateurs. The details were well-done but by no means any work of brilliance: just good competent professional work.

While Corner's own site shows lovely photos of the High Line, he does not (appropriately) offer any explanation that LU and the High Line are in any way connected nor that the Corner had a role in creating the strategic vision.

and (3) whether James Corner is a Landscape Urbanist.

Well he claims to be one so why disagree with his own assessment?

 

"Visit Constantinople Now"

The scary sub-headline states Istanbul’s history deserves preservation, but at what cost to development? 

And while the article does raise some fears that preservation will stop much-needed development, the author's put-away advice is to Visit Constantinople Now.

Many academics have worked to draw up conservation plans for the city. So has UNESCO. But they don’t have the power to enforce them. UNESCO, claiming that the Turkish government has disregarded its reports, has threatened to embarrass Istanbul by putting its cultural treasures on its endangered list. But on the historic peninsula, rates of return on investment in development are among the highest in the world—exceeded only by those in Moscow. For developers, the amount of money at stake is phantasmagoric. They’re willing to spend a lot to make legal and political obstacles go away. Archaeologists can’t compete.

So come visit now, while it’s all still here.

That's  www.city-journal.org of course and another example of City Journal slant even from its own authors.

Obviously, as the article states. development has NOT been stopped by preservation, but I wonder the balance? I would bet that development is rarely stopped or even modified -- but then again, that is a somewhat objective question and possible to answer in hard money. The article would be more valuable if some real economic numbers could be applied.

One other factor to consider when development is inevitable: make sure the job is well-done and worthy of visiting by generations hence. The loss is multiplied when a valuable historic structure is lost and what's built in its place is junk, which is often.

Looks as if Steve Balmer might have designed it

No true reflection on Balmer who might in fact be very imaginative, but the popular rap on him is that he is not the guy to revitalize Microsoft as his ideas are just so yesterday. And that's what Apple's new headquarters looks like. Some idea of "THE FUTURE" from the 1950s when Jobs was born.

Here is Jobs' conventional, boring, 1950s idea of how to redevelop a blighted neighborhood — having nothing to do it!

Photo: Courtesy Apple

No "courtesy" to Apple, actually. It makes Apple look foolish.

And specifically, SF Gate has it all wrong:

To be clear, it looks like a wonderful project. It promises to convert an industrial section of town adorned principally with asphalt into one of the nation's great corporate headquarters, a 3.1 million-square-foot circular structure surrounded by acres of native landscaping and housing its own green-energy center.

via www.sfgate.com

Sums up the issue

From an article on Viaduct politics  (by Knute Berger in Crosscut), one of my comments on another comment:

To Kieth.

You speak with certainty that "The work would stop all use of the Viaduct during the construction period..."

I'd like to remind you that that was NOT the case with the Spokane Street Viaduct. Obviously, without question, it is possible to do major construction while such a structure is being used — we have just done it. Is there a cost? Is there annoyance? Of course but it clearly made sense on the SSV.

I could challenge every one of your other vague and undocumented assertions. But I won't because, alas, i don't believe that facts are at issue.

You think it is worth some vast and unknown amount of money and environmental impact to take down the Viaduct.

I have a different set of values and priorities focussing on the sort of civic interventions illustrated (literally) by my book City Comforts.

— via crosscut.com

What is the Tunnel Referendum Really About?

After King County Superior Court Judge Laura Gene Middaugh ordered a single section of an ordinance related to tunnel construction to be placed on the ballot, many voters rightly wondered: How does this impact the overall project? Fortunately, Judge Middaugh answered that question in court: “This decision is not a referendum on whether we’re going to have a tunnel or not.” publicola.com

Once upon a time I took several classes with Edward Said, the critic and Palestinian activist. He taught me a lot. For example, when starting with a text -- as this Referendum is, a "text" -- he said to start with verbs and nouns -- what is actually happening. The basics. Who is speaking? Doing what? etc etc

And then once you are clear about the people and their actions, then you can interpret to heart's content. As an old carpenter told me, "First you carpent, then finish." Get the framework right and then customize and smooth things out as you like.

So what puzzles me about the Referendum is not what it _means_ in the sense of interpretation and "the big picture," but literally what it _says_: the small picture. The Referendum says "The City Council is authorized to decide whether to issue the notice..."

Are we literally taking away the power of the Council to decide YES? or NO? If I vote "REJECTED" then am I saying  " "The City Council is NOT authorized to decide whether to issue the notice...?" Seems kinda strange. But that is what appears to say.

Mind, I am very much against the Tunnel and want to vote against it, but damned if I can understands the actions buried in the Referendum.

•••

Here is whole text from the Seattle P-I:

REFERENDUM 1

The Seattle City Council passed Ordinance Number 123542 entering into agreements related to the Alaskan Way Viaduct replacement. Section 6 of that ordinance has been referred to the voters for approval or rejection.

Section 6, if approved, would authorize the City Council to give notice to proceed, beyond preliminary design work, with three agreements concerning the State’s proposal to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct with a deep-bore tunnel. Section 6 states:

“The City Council is authorized to decide whether to issue the notice referenced in Section 2.3 of each Agreement. That decision shall be made at an open public meeting held after issuance of the Final Environmental Impact Statement.”

Should this ordinance section be:

Approved?

Rejected?

via blog.seattlepi.com

Just so beautiful

Shot at Whistler. Listen to the music, too.

<

We Used to Wait

by Arcade Fire

I used to write
I used to write letters
I used to sign my name
I used to sleep at night
Before the flashing lights settled deep in my brain
But by the time we met
The times had already changed
So I never wrote a letter
I never took my true heart
I never wrote it down
So when the lights cut out
I was left standing in the wilderness downtown

Now our lives are changing fast
Hope that something pure can last

It seems strange
How we used to wait for letters to arrive
But what's stranger still
Is how something so small can keep you alive
We used to wait
We used to waste hours just walkin around
We used to wait
All those wasted lives in the wilderness downtown

Ooooo we used to wait
Sometimes it never came
Ooooo we used to wait
Sometimes it never came
Ooooo we used to wait
Still moving through the pain

I'm gonna write a letter to my true love
I'm gonna sign my name
Like a patient on a table
I Wanna walk again
Gonna move through the pain

Now our lives are changing fast
Hope that something pure can last

Ooh we used to wait
Sometimes it never came
Ooh we used to wait
Sometimes it never came
Ooh we used to wait
Still moving through the pain

We used to wait for it
Now we're screaming
Sing the chorus again

I used to wait for it
Hear my voice screaming
Sing the chorus again

Wait for it

 

Council Will Put Tunnel Referendum On Ballot | PubliCola

In a subdued press conference this afternoon, four members of the Seattle City Council said they planned to send an ordinance to put a portion of legislation adopting three agreements on the deep-bore tunnel on the ballot Monday. However, they argued that the referendum—which King County Superior Court judge Laura Gene Middaugh ruled could go to the ballot this afternoon—was merely a vote on the “process” for moving the tunnel forward, and not an up-or-down vote on the tunnel itself, which is how tunnel opponents have represented it.

via publicola.com

Tragic isn't it? And all because different interests bought into the big myth that the Repair was too expensive. What puzzles me is how easily people have been swayed that the Alaskan Way Viaduct can't be repaired economically while we are just completing an equivalent task with the Spokane Street Viaduct. Literally at the same time. And Spokane Street Viaduct is somewhat longer than the AWV, had similar soil conditions, was done while traffic kept moving (albeit probably with some vexation) and it cost just $160 million. Quite astonishing.

"Why are your houses so heavy?"

Bucky Fuller

...was interested in portability and nomadism; while a concrete foundation with utility connections was necessary, Fuller's idea of moving house was that you could pack your house down into a container that would fit on a truck, drive it to your new neighbourhood, and deploy it again — the design influences of the traditional Mongolian yurt should be obvious. The Dymaxion House used aluminium sheeting for floors and structures, suspended by wires from a central steel structural shaft: saving weight was a priority. As he famously asked an architect on one occasion, "why are your houses so heavy?"

via Charles Stross

Not sure it makes much sense to compare Fuller's Dymaxion house with Brutalist architecture, as Charle suggests, very very little of which was ever used in detached housing. A better comparison would be the Dymaxion house versus the mobile home or, if you are looking at the traditional and still most effective way to build quality housing, then versus 2 x stick-built. I've developed pre-fab housing and I'll bet you that in 50 years we are still building site-built stick construction (for detached and low-rise attached housing.) I could go on at length but many people want to believe otherwise (e.g. that pre-fab is "greener") and so I'd waste my breath. Yes, I love Bucky Fuller but when it comes to sustainability, it doesn't matter "how much a house weighs."

The High Line, sui generis

The High Line may be a landscaping project, but a good part of its success is due to its architectural setting, which, like the 12th Arrondissement, is crowded with interesting old and new buildings. The park courses through the meatpacking district and Chelsea, heavily populated, high-energy residential neighborhoods. Very few American cities — and Manhattan is the densest urban area in the country — can offer the same combination of history and density.

In other words, while the High Line’s success may seem to be an instance of “build it and they will come,” in New York, as in Paris, “they” are already there — living in the surrounding neighborhoods, working in the close-packed office buildings, touristing. Witold Rybczynski at the NYT

Of course I agree completely. Every now and then someone in Seattle says that we should use the Viaduct as a pedestrian park —  High time for a High Line? in Seattle— but there's been no political traction and mostly cat-calls. The big push among some urbanists is to tear down the Viaduct since it acts (claimed anyway) as a barrier to the waterfront from downtown. So it would be a bit at odds to say "Let's shut down the Viaduct for cars and use it for people." A certain dissonance. See citycomfortsblog.typepad.com

However I was puzzled, and a minor point certainly, that Rybczynski referred to the High Line as reflecting "landscape urbanism."

While well-known "landscape urbanist" James Corner was involved in the High Line design as to paving, lighting, planting and maybe even access, the genesis of the project and its genius — recognizing that the derelict train line could and should be saved as a park — long predated Corner's involvement. The High Line, so far as I see it, had nothing to do with "landscape urbanism" and should not get any credit for it. 

 

Tax Increment Financing = Windfall for Wall Street. Again.

The legislation, pushed by the CLC, will permit the trading of development rights between rural areas and cities in King, Pierce. and Snohomish counties, something that is already allowed, albeit not frequently done. More significantly, the new law will also let the cities finance infrastructure for new residents in development-rights-receiving areas by issuing bonds against the anticipated rise in property taxes.

via crosscut.com

Was “Justice” Served?

In the wake of the jubilant response to bin Laden’s killing, it is heartening to see such a quick discussion erupt over its legality. The State Department has released its legal rationale for the operation here. The Atlantic Wire summarizes various arguments. at www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com

Assuming that US forces simply killed bin Laden, was that proper? My take:

Does anyone think that OBL — had he gone to trial — would he himself claim that he had not been the leader of the conspiracies? i.e. been innocent by reason that "he didn't do it."

No, I am guessing that he would stipulate that he had lead the conspiracy, the attacks. He was, I gather, proud of having made war on the USA.

But he would claim excuse — that USA, Israel etc etc attacked Islam and that he was simply defending the Umma.

He would try to frame the trial as a political trial. He would have tried in court and all of his supporters and sympathizers (or people who sympathized with his perspective) would have created a trial outside court. It would have lasted for years.

To what benefit? To whose? The American people? The Saudi Arabian people? The Palestinian people? 

No, it’s better he is dead. For all.

Madrid Replaces a Highway with Park Space

You think the article starts off as typical faux urbanism -- against cars at the surface, more "open space," and all the other 1950s conventions -- but it ends with an O.Henry ending i.e. a surprise finish. 

In times of economic hardship, large infrastructural projects are usually welcomed for creating jobs and building public assets. The works of the WPA in the USA during the great depression are often referenced in this way. Certainly the Madrid Rio, seen alone, is a valuable addition to the city that has done much to correct decades of neglect and bad planning. But in Madrid, these projects were undertaken not in a crisis, but in the heat of a speculative boom. In all this excitement, and with seemingly overflowing municipal coffers, urban renewal was not undertaken in an incremental way — it was an attempt at instant transformation. What's more, the rush seemed too political, a kind of legacy-making that was more pharaonic than benevolent. via sustainablecitiescollective.com

"Be careful what you wish for."

For those of you wondering what Donald Trump's appeal is outside the crazy Birther/Neo-Birther camp, you need look no further than last night's speech before a well-lubricated crowd at the Treasure Island casino in Las Vegas, where the Donald dropped multiple F-bombs while accusing our nation's politicians of being "stupid" and "blood-sucking." via slog.thestranger.com

Donald Trump, GOP frontrunner for 2012, is a tacky, self-serving creep addicted to gazing in the mirror of public attention. So what? If he's warped, he's warped in a way that represents a dark and highly productive side of the American psyche. via crosscut.com

If someone has the idea that Obama released the birth certificate to make Trump look good because Trump could be a weak and comical Republican nominee. think of the old expression "Be careful what you wish for."

I think that Trump is tapping into a vein of anxiety and fear which is making him a very effective candidate. Don't laugh too soon.

"Big Ass Fans are the Prescription for Comfort"

Founded by six Harvard School of Design graduate students, MASS Design Group was presented with an opportunity to design a hospital in Rwanda for the Partners in Health organization. The group utilized design as a tool to help combat the spread of disease, keep patients comfortable and manage Rwanda’s unique climate.

via hvls.bigassfans.com

Harvard says so. 
Therefore it is true, 

How people used the streets

via www.youtube.com

Definitely worth watching. And listening to.

(Read the comments below the video.)

Tunnel wins if Surface/Transit framed as only alternative to the tunnel

Some sensible talk about the inapt comparison to Seoul's freeway tear-down. 

The SDOT Blog, Grist and the Slog all have posts covering a lecture about how Seoul torn down an elevated highway and replaced it with a stream, finding parallels with the Alaskan Way Viaduct...Whether or not you agree with the tunnel project, I think comparing Seoul to Seattle is absolutely and utterly ridiculous in this context.

via seattletransitblog.com

My take is that when it comes to politics, reason sometimes loses:

• Anti-tunnel people think that the vote -- if it happens -- will be about the tunnel — "YES" or "NO" e.g. Eli Sanders was articulate on that issue on KUOW recently.
• But pro-tunnel people will frame the issue -- over and over -- "Well what's the alternative to the Tunnel?"
• Mayor McGinn has no other alternative than Surface/Transit. I heard him asked about alternatives recently and frankly his answer -- Surface/Transit -- was lame and unconvincing.
• There is no way that a majority of the people of Seattle will (in effect) vote for Surface/Transit. They've said pretty convincingly in vote and polls.
• So as it is now, if Surface/Transit framed as only alternative, pro-tunnel wins.
• That would be a disaster.
• McGinn should create room for discussion of a long-term plan along the lines of  

Repair (now) and Prepare (to eventually tear down the Viaduct.)

Realistically, even in the best of circumstances,  suppose we had a 70% agreement on Surface/Transit and we were all set to do it. Would we really just tear it down? Don't you think that Preparation would take a number of years? You have to create a fairly complex new infrastructure and that itself will be both complex and contentious. So Surface/Transit means a fairly extensive period and probably would require more Repair.

Anyway, the voters simply won't go for an unadorned Surface/Transit. And that will be the way Pro-Tunnel forces will frame it. As a a commenter at publicola.com wrote:

I want the viaduct down and no new freeway above or below ground. But what you're saying is right: Repair and Prepare is a better way to get that than "Surface and Transit." People see the latter as a do-nothing option that will inevitably make traffic worse. Repair and Prepare has the same goal but commits to keeping the existing road up until we have alternatives in place. Those alternatives will essentially be the same as surface and transit but the staging will prevent the apocalyptic traffic scenario that people fear. 

The gaffe remains yet the teaching moment is lost. Part 2.

I was just reminded by a commenter (at my earlier post The gaffe remains yet the teaching moment is lost) that I hadn't completed a story I had promised. And now, just a few days ago, that NPR has compounded its prior mistakes with firing Juan Williams and Ellen Weiss and now the Schillers, the subject of panic and premature response has been on my mind again. So here's the rest of the sad tale:

As I was explaining, I was a member of the TradArch Listserv, moderated by Professor Richard John and hosted by the School of Architecture at the University of Miami. 

One day — and it's been a number of months ago though the several topics involved are still quite germane — a member of TradArch left this comment:

"I've seen some fuzzy renderings of what's proposed, and I don't like it. It's totally out of place visually. It makes no attempt to become integrated with the older buildings. A jihadist mentality is on view here, not merely a modernist point of view.

It's too bad that journalists don't discuss the issue from an architectural point of view. Too bad also that our leading architects are not making their opinions known. (Publicity of that kind would be bad for business, I suppose.)

I hadn't thought of it: with all that fury about about the mosque project near Wall Street, I hadn't received any sense of the project as a physical object and part of a city. Of course the design per se of the mosque was not the politixal issue. But I am so building-oriented that I thought it funny when I realized I hadn't even thought of the mosque as a real structure. So the comment was striking. 

Here's a sketch, just FWIW:

Comments followed from other TradArch members:

Commenter # 2:

Honestly, jihadist? Let's get a grip, there's enough fanaticism and demagoguery out there without the cool heads of Tradarch catching the fever.

Commenter #3:

I prefer the building that is presently on the site.

Commenter 4:

Interesting line in this article: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=38462?

"Trouble emerged after St. Nicholas announced its plans to build a traditional Greek Orthodox church building, 24,000 square feet in size, topped with a grand dome. Port Authority officials told the church to cut back the size of the building and the height of the proposed dome, limiting it to rising no higher than the World Trade Center memorial. The deal fell apart for good in March 2009, when the Port Authority abruptly ended the talks after refusing to allow church officials to review plans for the garage and screening area underneath. Sixteen months later, the two sides have still not met to resume negotiations."

Website for church: http://www.stnicholasnyc.com/ (What an unsettling image of the church under the burning towers)

Commenter 5:

Careful now Mr. ____, you are going to get the PC crowd upset with these kind of facts. Its not good for their agenda

Then, as if right on cue, Professor Richard John of the School of Architecture and "list-owner" (i.e. moderator), stated:

Having received some vigorous complaints from subscribers about the off-topic and offensive postings in this thread, it is my duty to remind everyone of the subject of this list:

"The Tradarch List is an open forum for the discussion of the theory and practice of traditional architecture."

This is NOT a forum for discussions about politics or religion, and most emphatically not the place for deliberately provocative statements about the religious beliefs of others. This thread is now closed and anyone who abuses the privileges of subscription by being gratuitously offensive to people of faith will lose them immediately. (emphasis added)

I was thunderstruck by his response. (Btw, I was NOT one of the commenters above.) If there would be any forum to discuss the design of a mosque (which is a pretty traditional form of building) I don't know where it would be.

But several points:

• there is such a thing as "jihadist mentality" and it is no disprespect to Moslems in general,
• the very first commenter wanted to make sure that the the discussion did not get out of hand,
• there is indeed such a thing as Islamic architecture,
• the discussion of the Park 51 mosque is obvious, big and needs sensible discussion..

Some cautionary reminders about civil discourse from Professor John would have been totally appropriate. Yes, people can get out of hand and rules have to be followed and had Professor John offered some guidelines, I would have seconded him.

But it seems to me that it was absurd — and especially absurd for a supposed educator of traditional design — to stop the discussion completely, to prevent such a prime teaching moment with knowledge able and sophisticated people. (TradArch is filled with some very smart people.) I could imagine that the discussion might have stood-alone for a broader audience to illuminate the nuanaces: What is Islamic architecture? Can the arrangement of spaces suggested by Islamic religious practice manifest a visual form different than we (i.e. non-Moslems) expect? Does or can "jihadist mentality" manifest itself in architecture? Does Park 51 in any way show it? And so forth and so on. What a loss to stop all that intelligence at play!

Of course Professor John's action transcends anything to do with Park 51 and becomes an even larger one:  how to conduct discussions in public about sensitive issues. To my view, Trad Arch and the School of Architecture at the University of Miami over-reacted, did a poor job of handling what was an extremely minor incident and lost a tremendous learning experience. I guess you might say that I am trying to make sure it is not completely lost. 

What do you think?

My hope is that Professor John and Dean Plater-Zyberk will reconsider their action to stymie discussion and open up the subject on TradArch. Now that would be real style.

UPDATE: Panicky over-reaction is seen in many contexts. Here's one today March 17, 2010 where Passenger vigilantism strikes again. It's a sign of the times and it is a sad sign as there will be many such potential upsets and chances for fear ahead of us. 

 

 

Royal views on new eco-homes

I can't quite

PRINCE Charles has challenged eco-town planners over the standard of thousands of new homes to be built in Bordon.

via www.petersfieldpost.co.uk

Must WalMart grow? And at ever-increasing rates?

The author doesn't like WalMart and that it is Too big to fail.

I accept his criticism that WalMart has injured many small towns and now lack a commercial infrastructure. But you know what, if WalMart disappeared, new capitalists would restart their bakeries and also the “butcher, traditional clothiers, shoe salesman, repair shops, printers” and so forth.

I ignore his statement that 

James Kunstler has the seminal insight on the real underlying cancer infecting our society, and that is this: the notion that we can get something for nothing. 

I ignore it as it 
1. implies that people were "better" in the past and  
2. because such an implied call to morality is bound to fail as it has been bound to fail by moralists for thousands of years.

But I am curious about the author's claim that 

Wal-Mart's business model, like everything else American, relies on ever-increasing rates of growth.

Of course WalMart needs to be profitable (even a co-op does) but why "ever-increasing rates of growth?" 

The author asserts it but don't offer any proof that it is true in a theoretical or historical sense.

A steady-state model would change (lower) the share price at Wall Street since expectations of future growth (at any rate) would be gone. And career expectations of people who already work at WalMart would change i.e. fewer no stores so fewer promotions etc. 

But why wouldn't WalMart still be a healthy organization in a steady-state mode?

My criticism may appear nit-picky but it is not: understanding the details of how things work is essential.

Johann Hari on Charles Windsor

Charles Windsor rings the death knell for the monarchy

A savage attack by Hari but leads to a conclusion parallel to mine: the monarchy and Charles Windsor will eventually part.

We'll have a Landscape Urbanism to kick around for a bit

But not forever.

I still read every commentary about Landscape Urbanism (LU) because as a marketing phenomenon it is remarkable. Here's another one and of course I largely agree with John Massengale: Is Landscape Urbanism the new New Urbanism? The RPA continues the debate

But put aside the debate, what puzzles me is "How does one actually use LU?"

Imagine I am an elected official and I've decided that LU is the next big thing and I have to get  my town involved.

How do I use it? Hire James Corner to design a park? Maybe. But then it's a park. Nothing new there. You have to go beyond the boundaries of a park before the park intervenes in a novel way.

Develop a new Comprehensive Plan based on LU principles? Sure. But what does that mean?  Implementing a Comprehensive Plan means — no matter its philosophy and values — changing the day-to-day world of how cities evolve through lot-by-lot construction.

What would a zoning code based on LU actually look like?  Beats me and I am curious to see one.

The more I see of LU is not so much as whether I agree with it but whether there isn't anything there. I have heard nothing about LU that would suggest anything new. 

For example, as I mentioned a few days ago about James Corner's analysis of Seattle Central Waterfront, there was nothing in it which would not be done by any reputable and competent designer. You start with what is: describing and characterizing existing conditions. I'll listen more but it's my sense that in reality LU offers nothing new by way of technique or intellectual structure. 

 

Oh dear: It's 2011 and more dreams burn down to ash

Faded 'green' promises could cost Destiny USA millions

My comment on the project 3 years ago —and I meant it literally when I read the news reports:  Hard to know if it's serious and that "someone ought to mention to the architect that isolated goof-itecture amidst a huge parking lot doesn't spell sustainable."

"Residents of award-winning, transit-oriented development say no to transit."

And you were surprised?

See that wide median running down the boulevard?  That's where the light rail will go.  Or not, as it may turn out.

So much for the widely-touted concept of “transit-ready” development.  The residents of an acclaimed new urbanist village built around planned light rail (or bus rapid transit) stops have decided that they don’t actually want the transit their community was designed for.  So let’s be more careful about the claims we make for master-planned suburban development, shall we? via sustainablecitiescollective.com

Honestly, I well understand the transit-oriented development concept — it would be nice to live near public transit — but I have never understood why anyone would want to live in a place characterized as "transit-oriented" or closer than a block from it (assuming it is surface and generates noise. And yes that definitely includes diesel buses.).

Sure Doug Kelbaugh's label was good as a working-draft way of describing building public transport along with new housing. But I always thought the name was a non-starter in terms of market appeal and definitely not something I'd want to live right next to. A block or so away, yes.

Or right next to it? Maybe if I come to it, and can see the impacts beforehand, OK.

But when it comes to me? After I live there and like the park — median for transit? It's a park!!! — and in my vivid imagination of everything that can go wrong? No way.

The lesson for me is that urbanism starts as an acquired taste and that an awful lot of people do not want cityness imposed on them but want to drive to it. Irony acknowledged. The situation (described above) reinforces my view that public consciousness is an essential — perhaps the essential — element of urban placemaking. 

The even bigger lesson is one that emerged out of an accidental but interesting on-line exhange of emails see —
The holy grail of planning: Transforming the auto-dominant strip-mall arterial
— in which some genuine experts were forced to acknowledge, that no one, anywhere in the USA, is aware of having done (or even well-launched) a complete reversal of a suburb built around a through arterial. Now that's a different question from the one above but it is related in terms of the large politics of suburban change.

The lasting question for me is to consider exactly when and how far to spend time and money on retrofitting suburbia rather than focussing on working primarily on the inner-ring of settlements which already have an urban form? I'm working through the question and have no settled answer yet, but as a matter of priorities, we might need to consdier triage and to work only on the places which have a chance.

I imagine someone has already developed a working list of priorities for retrofitting i.e. which places and under which conditions offer the greatest likelihood of success.

"The storefronts are a nice urban touch, but if you look behind this building..."

Interesting way to characterize "cityness." The blogger (www.urbanophile.com) appears to be saying that having parking (at least a large lot) is per se un-urban. Yes the parking lot (below) does look very big and the sidewalk is barren and anything which proclaims a "tradition" makes me suspicious, but I had just hadn't ever seen storefronts as an "urban touch" rather than the essence of urbanity. I think that it is a practical necessity that there will be parking lots in outlying yet urban neighborhoods. 

Then again, I haven't been there and perhaps indeed the scale of the lot even with  permeable front, the wide sidewalk and the on-street parking doesn't work as urban. Is the main entry from the parking lot? I see no people in either location.

__________________________________________________________________________________

The storefronts are a nice urban touch, but if you look behind this building you see a gigantic parking lot. This is perhaps an example of faux-urbanism. 

Putting the parking lot in the back doesn’t make it any less a strip mall. It is a difference in form, not function.

__________________________________________________________________________________